The divorce issue is leading the country down the same road travelled in the 1960s when the ill-thought decree on interdiction scarred the country for generations. Now, 50 years later, the interests of thousands of people are being ignored by those elected to protect them. Priests are warning those who vote for divorce to forget about entering a church or present themselves for Communion and threatening eternal damnation. By their very stand they presumptuously pass judgement on all divorced Catholics throughout the world in sharp contrast to what their fellow clergymen in other countries advise their parishioners.

So far, all those against divorce have failed to come up with one concrete proposal on how to resolve the problems created by the increasing number of separations and how to protect the children born out of the new relationships that are created as a result of the family split. The most ludicrous statement was made by the anti-divorce lobby and the Church insisting that a battered wife should only have the option to separate because her violent husband could abuse another woman. Are they inferring that we do not have efficient legal and judicial systems to protect the victims of domestic abuse from violent persons?

The fundamental issues of this civil matter are simple and have nothing to do with religion. Divorce has been on our statute books for more than 30 years even though in its present format it discriminates against the majority of our society. It is a point that many forget and is not stressed often enough. Many Maltese families have been created after one of the spouses divorced abroad, (in some cases more than once, with children from more than one marriage), celebrated their new union in a religious ceremony in Malta and today have a happy and stable marriage with children. It is an undeniable fact.

Separations will continue to happen as they have in the past and increasingly so. MPs from both sides and the anti-divorce lobby can continue to bury their heads in the sand despite all the unfortunate examples around them. Divorce does not cause a marriage failure. It provides a new opportunity to those who want it.

Divorce is not imposed on those who do not need it. It is an option to those who, having experienced the trauma of a failed marriage, seek to reorganise their life in a stable relationship. It protects both sides and any children born out of that bond. Why should those who do not need divorce vote to impose their belief on others and deny them the opportunity to start a new family? Wouldn’t it be fairer not to show up at the voting booth? On the other hand by voting against the introduction of divorce they will be responsible for the continued unregulated mayhem we have right now where partners in a relationship can just walk out leaving the other party and children to fend for themselves. All those who proclaim to uphold family values should support the introduction of divorce because it offers an option for the creation of a family that provides protection for the children.

One has to take comments on family values with a pinch of salt when at the same time, a cohabitation law that is the very antithesis of marriage and stable families, has been presented in Parliament. It makes the anti-divorce position taken by the same people who proposed the law a case of double standards at best; at worst a hypocritical and self-serving position.

Once the PN chose to politicise the issue it is the PN that stands to lose on a political level whatever the result on May 28. One thing is certain; the 1993 concordat needs to be rewritten.